I don't know but they had some pretty damn good presidents in the past. Teddy Roosevelt was a strong supporter of segregation of state and religion, Eisenhower who greatly expanded social security and built the Interstate network and last but not least Lincoln.

aad0906 wrote:I don't know but they had some pretty damn good presidents in the past. Teddy Roosevelt was a strong supporter of segregation of state and religion, Eisenhower who greatly expanded social security and built the Interstate network and last but not least Lincoln.

aad0906 wrote:I don't know but they had some pretty damn good presidents in the past. Teddy Roosevelt was a strong supporter of segregation of state and religion, Eisenhower who greatly expanded social security and built the Interstate network and last but not least Lincoln.

when will any of you morons realize political party means as much as the turd I just dropped ever so gracefully from my balloon knot?

You missed the point. When you look back at American History, every great idea or change came from Liberals. Conservatism means never change. You're always going to identify with one group better than the other. Just because you don't care about politics or don't know anything about politics doesn't mean that it's all the same. Republicans and Democrats are not the same party. And there are sharp differences between Repubs and Dems on the national level. And there's a world of difference between our commentators.

when will any of you morons realize political party means as much as the turd I just dropped ever so gracefully from my balloon knot?

If a person is told since birth that the bowels from your balloon knot smell good, and if that person constantly reinforces his opinion of its superior smell (via confirmation bias, etc.), then should we be surprised at such an person's acquired taste for balloon bowels?

If we're not surprised yet remain indignant, then how do we convince such a person that the balloon bowels smell terrible and should not be consumed?

Phatscotty wrote:The answer to this very serious question can be represented best in this short 8 minute video clip

::lights dim::

Haha, that was entertaining.

Some quibbles come to mind, but that video represents the Ideal Republican Party. Through the US political system, I still see similar outcomes from both Democrats and Republicans on the role of government and its discretion over the economic-decision making of the citizens.

It does remind me of the backflips socialism and its adherent have gone through in order to continually remove themselves from the failed socialist experiments. It may not be possible, but I wonder how many socialists--including those of the non-state/somehow minimal-state type--viewed the Soviet Union and fascists in a positive light before the years leading up to WW2.

EDITS: In Intellectuals and Society by Thomas Sowell, he has some great and embarrassing quotes by such people during the 1930s. I'd recommend you read it. And, it reads very easily too!

Last edited by BigBallinStalin on Mon Aug 27, 2012 9:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.

when will any of you morons realize political party means as much as the turd I just dropped ever so gracefully from my balloon knot?

You missed the point. When you look back at American History, every great idea or change came from Liberals. Conservatism means never change. You're always going to identify with one group better than the other.

You're assuming "change" is always good and should always be desired.

In today's political reality, I would contend that the only change being proposed is from within the Republican party via Tea Party conservatives as they're the only ones calling for a change in real fiscal policies and deficit spending.

If the Rules Committee Report were to pass without adoption of the Minority Reports, it would amount to a power grab by Washington, D.C. party insiders and consultants designed to silence the voice of state party activists and Republican grassroots by:

*** Handing national party officials the power to change national party rules adopted by state and grassroots leaders at the Republican National Convention. For generations, the prohibition of manipulated changes in the national Rules of the Republican Party between national conventions has served as one of the crown jewels of our party. It’s a power grab which opens the door to many future power grabs.

*** Stripping state parties in all states with binding primaries of the power of choosing who will represent their states as national delegates and alternate delegates.

This outrageous change would empower presidential campaigns to disapprove and remove delegates and alternate delegates selected by rules adopted by state Republican parties. Rather than grassroots activists who won delegate and alternate delegate slots by following state party rules, a large majority of positions would be handed to top donors of the winning campaign.

*** Gutting the great and successful reform adopted in the current election cycle to stop the dangerous trend to front-load the selection of national convention delegates. Our party would move again toward a national primary which would deny grassroots Republicans the opportunity to vet presidential candidates in a nomination contest of reasonable length. This reform must not be abandoned.